Public Employment Services: Policies and Practices

By Fons Leroy, Lenka Kint and Martina Winkler

An insight into PES policies and practices.

Public Employment Services are confronted with the ever-changing world of work from various angles: as organisation, as employer and as key actor on the labour market. Decisive mega trends such as globalisation, demographic shifts or migration, driven by tremendous technological developments and characterised by a considerable extent of complexity and volatility, have a huge impact on our labour markets and finally on PES.
Guiding citizens through this (r)evolution and supporting them to manage necessary or desired transitions is a shared challenge of European PES and a huge public responsibility PES are actively taking up. Thereby PES are contributing to well-balanced labour markets which are essential for sustainable growth and for maintaining our social welfare supporting systems.
PES jointly develop solutions through exchanging and learning from each other, rethinking practices and policies and continuously improving their organisations for more sustainable and inclusive labour markets and in order to better serve employers and jobseekers. This book gives an insight into PES policies and practices which are inspired by the close collaboration in the PES Network. PES Network members reflect on their European-wide learning organisation, they point out challenges and their strategic and operational answers from a national perspective, bringing in valuable personal experience. “PES Policies and Practices” thus touches upon a broad variety of PES core topics and gives you the chance to understand their business in a politically shaped environment, characterised by a unique collaboration.

The collection of voices from the PES Network world in this book demonstrates the Network´s potential to anticipate and respond to changes in the world of work.

EXTRACT

What is Benchlearning about?
How do other Public Employment Services (PES) solve problems? What is the secret of
their success? Can I learn from the others and transfer successful practices?
PES try to find answers on these questions through “Benchlearning”.
Comparing performance, benchmarking, was the main subject of the initial discussions
in the Network of Heads of PES going back to the 1998s. Over time, the focus moved to
mutual
learning and the exchange of good practices across Europe.
Benchlearning combines these two main elements. It is about interlinking benchmarking
and mutual learning. In more detail: The PES Network Decision defines Benchlearning as
“process of creating a systematic and integrated link between benchmarking and mutual
learning activities that consists of identifying good performances through indicator-based
benchmarking systems […] and of using findings for tangible and evidence-informed
mutual
learning activities, including good or best practice models”.

ABOUT AUTHORS

Fons Leroy was the chief executive officer of VDAB, the Flemish Public Employment Service, and current Chair of the European Network of Public Employment Services.

Lenka Kint was from 2011 to 2017 Executive Sercetary at WAPES, the World Association of Public Employment Services, and is currently Strategic accountmanager International Relations at VDAB.

Martina Winkler is a Seconded National Expert from the German Federal Employment Agency to the EU Commission, working in the PES Network Secretariat on the Benchlearning initiative.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Die Keure Publishing
• Release date: Sep 19, 2019
• ISBN: 9782874035722

Book preview

AUTHORS

CHAPTER 1

EUROPEAN PES GROWING TOGETHER

Many years ago in Amsterdam – how the network of PES began

Gudrun Nachtschatt, Senior expert Benchlearning, EU Commission

The transition from the informal HoPES Network to the institutionalised PES Network

Wolfgang Mueller, Managing Director for European Affairs, German Federal Employment Agency, Alternate Member of the Board in the PES Net-work, PES Germany

Underlying ideas of the PES Network

Detlef Eckert, Huawei Global Government Affairs Dept

What is Benchlearning about?

Ralf Holtzwart, Managing Director of the Regional Directorate Bavaria, German Federal Employment Agency

Martina Winkler, PES Germany, Seconded National Expert at the European Commission, Expert Benchlearning, EU Commission

The second round of Benchlearning

Renata Häublein, Managing Director of the Employment Agency in Nuremberg, German Federal Employment Agency

Martina Winkler, PES Germany, Seconded National Expert at the European Commission

An example of Benchlearning and best practices from Spain

Gerardo Gutiérrez Ardoy, General Director of the Spanish Public Employment Service (SEPE), PES Network Board Member, PES Spain

An example of a sub-network: Collaboration in the Baltic PES

Aiga Balode, Deputy Director, State Employment Agency of Latvia, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Latvia

Inga Balnanosienė, Director of Vilnius client department, Employment Service under the Ministry of social security and labour in Lithuania, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Lithuania

Karolin Kõrreveski, Advisor on international Cooperation, PES Estonia, Advisor for European Public Employment Services Affairs, PES Estonia

1. HISTORY OF THE PES NETWORK

1.1 Many years ago in Amsterdam – how the network of PES began

Gudrun Nachtschatt

It all started with a very first meeting of the then 15 Heads of PES in 1997 in Amsterdam. It took place during the Dutch Presidency of the European Union, following a EURES conference in Ireland in the previous year, where several Heads of PES had met and discussed that sharing know-how and experience among the managers would be a good idea.

1997 was the year in which the first Employment Guidelines were endorsed as a reaction to the economic and monetary integration of EU Member States. Later that year, employment policies were highlighted as an essential policy field in the treaty of Amsterdam. For the first time, PES were mentioned as important stakeholders and actors on the labour market. Their role in fighting against unemployment, social exclusion and providing skilled workers for growing economies was acknowledged. Consequently, a stronger cooperation amongst PES was put on the agenda.

However, employment policy remained a national task and the European Commission applied for the first time the method of open coordination, defining objectives and tasks and monitoring indicators. Employment was seen as the most important factor in the fight against poverty and social exclusion. Increasing the employment rate and preventing long-term unemployment were important objectives on the social agenda, in the European Employment Strategy as well as in most Member States. Still, it was up to the Member States and national organisations to decide how and what to do. Thus, a need for cooperation between the European Commission and the PES emerged.

The first meeting of Heads of PES – a Dutch initiative

Actually, it was a Dutch initiative to organise this first meeting for Heads of PES in cooperation with and funded by the Commission. The meeting was probably a success for both, the Heads of PES and the Commission. It was the starting point for numerous meetings to follow, usually twice a year and prepared by (newly introduced) meetings of assistants (today’s Advisors for European PES Affairs).

Rather boring lectures on the Employment Strategy

The aim of the Commission was to make Heads of PES better contribute to the objectives of the Employment Strategy, e.g. by collecting information on PES activities implementing the guidelines. Exemplary items of the agendas of these early meetings, like the one in Helsinki in 1999, reflected the role of PES on the local labour market or recent development of the Employment Strategy. It is the first agenda I have found in my folders. Other items on early agendas were the annually adapted guidelines, EURES, long-term unemployment or youth unemployment. Some of the topics should be followed by discussions, but I cannot remember an atmosphere characterised by open exchange of opinion. I would even say, first meetings have been rather boring. There were many more barriers than just language barriers. As participants, we received many slides with lots of text which everybody already knew. No doubt, that the Employment Strategy and the Guidelines build the foundation for a common mission of our PES organisations and this was an important step. But there was not yet a common ground and understanding of each other, which is essential for inspiring discussion. Yet, we had – with a few exceptions – no idea of what the other PES looked like; what their tasks were and how they were managed; what kind of jobseekers were registered and which were not; how jobseekers were counted; what was understood by the terms transition to employment, and early intervention, labour market training or assessment, and what are other PES doing to prevent long-term unemployment. Due to a certain lack of mutual and comparable information, contributions to a discussion did not fall on fertile ground. Indeed, there was nothing like the reports, fact sheets or capacity reports or the Knowledge Centre that we have today. Studies contracted by the Commission focussed rather on aggregated findings and rarely on single PES.

Still, the meetings continued, usually all Heads of PES attended and it was obvious that there was an added value: Mainly on important issues besides the formal agenda.

A hidden agenda – parallel networks and EU funded projects

The really important results of these early meetings were twofold: Firstly, we got to know our colleagues from abroad. Among the assistants especially, trust and confidence and even friendship was built up. Secondly, we had access to calls for tender and European cofunding of transnational projects. I think this was the main added value of the first years of the network of PES.

It was obvious that the hidden agenda was more important than the official one: Parallel to the official network several other sub-networks of Heads of PES were initiated and have been growing over time. These sub-networks were self-determined. I remember a network of Scandinavian PES, later on a Baltic one and a network of German speaking PES, still existing today.

The sub-networks, where first-hand experience could be exchanged among PES managers and site-visits took place to see how other PES were working, were one of the substantial consequences.

As important, for the further development of today’s PES Network, was that the Commission launched EU funds for transnational projects to stimulate mutual learning of PES. These projects, in which national experts participated, were exciting and challenging – since language barriers, different concepts and a lack of comparable information led to quite some misunderstandings and heated discussions. Still, we all learned and discussed projects e.g. dealing with self-service tools, individual action plans or on youth and long-term unemployment. New and exciting times with site visits and workshops in other PES were popping up.

EU co-funded projects – early PES initiatives

One project I remember in particular, because it illustrates what the needs of PES were like, is a French-Swedish initiative starting at the end of 1998. Together with some other PES, the Dutch, Le Forem, and the Spanish, worked on methods on how to find good practice and to share experience. When the report was presented in a final conference in Paris in early 2001 all agreed it was of big interest and importance to European PES. Thus, the Heads of PES decided on further developing a concept for structured cooperation and a systematic approach to enhance the exchange of knowledge, good practice and experience among European PES – and were willing to fund this initiative themselves. An autonomous and self-determined initiative with 17 PES was founded and called Partners in Development (PPD). The Swedish PES provided the secretariat. Several work groups were in place, for example on guiding and counselling, on indicators to compare results of PES or on further developing employer services. The Partners in Development were finally integrated as the European part of the World Association of PES: WAPES-Europe.

Besides the Partners in Development, another project, starting in 2002, can be seen as one of the roots of today’s Benchlearning in the PES Network. It was an Austrian initiative in cooperation with the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgian PES applying for EU funding. The aim of the project was to agree on common strategic goals and outcome indicators which should be relevant and measurable for all the PES involved. We (and our managements) expected to get answers to several questions: How to compare our results with those of other PES to know if we are doing well or not? How can good practices be identified? Finally, how can we achieve better results by comparing and learning? When discussing indicators in these working group meetings, many of us realised for the first time how different PES are. The differences did not only refer to the legal situation, the tasks and organisational context of PES, but also on the level of basic concepts. Suddenly all old certainties disappeared: What is an unemployed person? Only those receiving unemployment benefits? Those working part-time and looking for a full-time job? What about students graduating from schools and universities? Similar questions came up with regards to transitions into employment: What is employment? Every job with a few hours weekly? Or only a job with full contributions to social insurance? A job, which leads to an income to live from? What about self-employment?

It seemed everything had to be questioned and discussed in order to know what we are really talking about. 10 years later, the project (with in the meantime 20 PES participating) was stopped when the new network and today’s Benchlearning exercise became visible as a future task for all 30 PES.

Towards a PES knowledge base: PES to PES Dialogue

Over the years the Commission tried more and more to meet the PES’ needs. As part of the work programme during the last years of the former informal network of Heads of PES, the European Commission launched a comprehensive mutual learning programme for European PES, the PES to PES Dialogue (2010-2014). Topics were agreed with the network according to PES priorities for capacity building. For the first time, concept papers, summary reports and practices were published on a dedicated European PES website creating a knowledge base accessible for all. Many PES took up impulses and practices. The knowledge base was used by EU partner countries, ILO, WAPES and development agencies.

Together with the work of the benchmarking group, it provided the basis to do the next fundamental step: to come to a systematic assessment of PES performance and to target mutual learning and mutual assistance and support among peer PES.

1.2 The transition from the informal HoPES Network to the institutionalised PES Network

Wolfgang Mueller

The tradition of the Heads of Public Employment Services (HoPES) in Europe to meet is a long one. Starting in 1997, an atmosphere of collaboration and trust has been established over the years and survived the constant changes – not least the personnel changes both at the level of the Heads as well as the Assistants responsible for international/ European affairs. The idea of sharing experiences, looking at benchmarks, coming together in working groups and initiating bi-or multilateral projects was therefore not unfamiliar when the crisis hit. Having started as a monetary and economic crisis, soon the impact showed dramatically on the labour market as well. It became painfully visible that the Public Employment Services (PES) were neither prepared nor able to adjust in time to the scale and impact. As a result, all known performance indicators for PES decreased sharply.

At this point, the necessity for new innovative ideas was extremely high. When you start rethinking your business model, usually several options as a source for new ideas are available:

1.Asking your own staff, not necessarily in the Head Offices, but more from the grass-root-level

2.Asking academics/ researchers about the newest ideas

3.Looking at other national administrations, although the field of work differs

4.Engaging consultancy companies like McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group, etc.

5.And finally, asking your colleagues abroad who do work in the same area, even if constitutional or governance factors differ a lot.

When you start looking abroad, instantly one potential pool of innovative ideas comes into one’s mind: the European Social Fund. Designed as an instrument to finance new, in the national context non-existing, projects for evaluation for transformation into a national regular instrument, it could deliver a vast repository of successful and unsuccessful ideas. Sadly, there is no structured and systematic classification of projects, their intentions, their staffing, their indicators, etc. and it could therefore be ruled out.

The other idea was to extend the already existing exchange among peers in the HoPES Network. When it came to using this source for addressing the challenges deriving from the crisis, very quickly, the shortfalls of the structure and governance of the Network at that time became visible:

–Ownership was not among the PES themselves, but with the European Commission

–Funding elements focused on meetings, conferences and studies, but not on the exchange of best practices in a more detailed way

–Technically, there were only elements to measure performance, but no mechanism to systematically increase performance (or as one member pointed out: we do know how to weigh pigs, but we have no idea how to fatten them)

–A non-binding, extremely voluntary atmosphere.

Although there were a few shortcomings, to institutionalise the gathering of the HoPES was the most promising idea and we just had to think about a structured way to uphold the strong points for getting together and to address at the same time the identified weaknesses.

The basic concept stands on the following pillars:

–Institutionalisation and creation of a more binding commitment by a legal act: Labour market issues, but also educational and migration topics, are at the core of PES responsibilities and they become more important in Europe by the day. An all European PES including network with a clear mandate, tasks and procedures would on one side guarantee, that a comprehensive European picture can be created. Therefore, it could be ruled out that certain topics are dominated by the bigger countries or the most willing countries: the Network has to make sure that all national perspectives are brought together for a complete picture whereas at the same time each national PES is committed to actively participate and contribute for creating that whole picture. The Network should also be based on a legal act to enhance its reputation and credibility in the European sphere, as it is not just another informal network in Europe.

–Ownership among the PES through governance: PES know best what is important for PES, what subjects should be elaborated, what perspectives should be highlighted from which angle. At the same time the knowledge of the Commission, their hints and deep knowledge of all European affairs as well as how Europe functions are essential for a well-functioning and especially a well targeted work of the Network. So, the idea was to shift the management and the presiding role to the PES, whereas the Commission not only remains on the Board of the Network, but also runs the Secretariat of the Network. As a lot of PES are part of their Ministries and being a main body in employment affairs in Europe, it was quickly decided to give the Employment Committee (EMCO) the only observer role to the PES Network.

–Two major strands as tasks: PES have a very deep knowledge of what works and what does not work. Policy making always consists of policy design and policy delivery. One can have a perfect policy design and it will not live up to its expectations if it is poorly executed. On the other hand you can have a perfect delivery system/ organisation in place, but with only a little or poorly designed toolbox one cannot bring that working muscle to its full potential. Whereas the policy design level was well established (through the council structures), the crisis showed that there was no real insight into the delivery aspects of policy. It was therefore clear that the PES have to bundle their knowledge and expertise in a cohesive way and bring it up to the European institutions. At the same time, the crisis demonstrated mercilessly how ill-equipped European PES are, left alone to counter the effects of the crisis. It was obvious that one major task was to increase the capacity and capability of PES to become more crisis-adept – if not for now, then at least for the future. And there is no better help out there for these tasks than to ask your fellow PES who are working for decades on the same issues as one’s own PES. Every single PES, no matter how small or resource-poor it may seem, has good ideas and knowledge worth being shared among the others. To create transparency about that and to bundle this expertise in a systematic and structured way led to the decision to define this area as the second pillar for the PES Network.

The concept was introduced to the Council of Employment Ministers who endorsed it and tasked the European Commission to draw up a proposal for institutionalisation, including the above-mentioned elements. This time, there was an extensive consultation with all actors involved to convince them not only of the concept behind the proposal, but more of the bigger idea behind. In a relatively short time, the process came to a positive conclusion, but the final test was still to come: there was an element of volunteerism introduced into the legal note, so that any Member State could choose to participate or not to participate. The aim was of course that every Member State joins the Network voluntarily to participate bindingly in the task outlined in the legal act. If a Member State was not convinced of the bigger idea, the basic concept and the necessity to open the books for others to gain insight, the whole initiative would collapse. At the end, there was a unanimous decision to participate and in September 2014 it was time to say Consummatum est.

Finally, I also accompanied this transition from a rather loose relationship to the institutionalised PES Network. This happened in different ways: the idea for the original Benchlearning concept was proposed not only by the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, but by myself. It was only logical to become the head of the Working Group and to come up with a first concept for the methodology to be proposed to the Network for endorsement. Further conceptual work was necessary to establish the Rules for Procedure for the Network. As the first Chair of the PES Network, the CEO of the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, was elected, the first steps of the newborn baby needed to be accompanied and supported. Not clearly addressed issues had to be clarified, formats needed to be